SCUM "CHURCH" TO PAY BIG TIME

[K3XR]

It's about time this low life crew got what they deserve. #For the hate Rush and other free speech, as long as it's our kind of free speech, crowd, save your breath.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news....t.story (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/bal-westboro1031,0,4193323,print.story)

[kc2orw]

Good they are slime don't matter if you are for or against the Iraq war but at least respect peoples privacy especially at that time.

Fred Phelps is also a Democrat or at least he ran as one...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Phelps#Democratic_Party

[KC9JIQ]

Quote[/b] (K3XR @ Oct. 31 2007,15:02)]It's about time this low life crew got what they deserve. #For the hate Rush and other free speech, as long as it's our kind of free speech, crowd, save your breath.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news....t.story (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/bal-westboro1031,0,4193323,print.story)
This is sad, but I am sure he will repeal it, hopefully to the supreme court!

Fred has the right to protest, as we all do. #You're willing to trash the first amendment to stop those who your against.

So if this was in the glory days of Hitler, those of you that want Fred off the streets of mean America, would actually support the sending of Jews to camps. #They are the inferior race.

[N3ATS]

This has nothing to do with free speech. The funerals are not sanctioned by the government, they are private ceremonies.

These people came to inflict emotional distress and nothing more. They got owned.

It's about time.

[KC9JIQ]

Quote[/b] (N3ATS @ Oct. 31 2007,15:53)]This has nothing to do with free speech. #The funerals are not sanctioned by the government, they are private ceremonies. #

These people came to inflict emotional distress and nothing more. #They got owned.

It's about time.
and what does this have to do about privacy, they are protesting on the STREETS, PUBLIC places obeying all laws.

They are not trying to sneek in to the service and then do some lawless protest, they are OUTSIDE and many places a 1,000 feet back, they are not invading anyones privacy.

Again all this comes down to it, is protesting and the ones who want to stop it.

If anything we need MORE protesting, this passive "as seen on T.V." generation is quite alarming.

[KC5CSG]

I am about the biggest supporter of free speech. What Phelps does doesn't fall under free speech. It falls under harrassment. I'm in full support of the verdict. This nutt got what he deserved. Being a soldier myself it actually pained me to see what this guy was doing to my fellow soldiers. I know part of my job is the willingness to die for each americans freedom. The only thing I ask in the event of my death is that my wife and kids are taken care of and appreciation is shown to them for my sacrifice. I would never expect some mad man to go to my funeral screaming to my wife that god wanted me to die because god has issues with my government on their policies on homosexuals. Soldiers are not the ones making them policies even though we're the ones dying for them. If I die serving YOU then at least appreciate my death. Don't celebrate it.

I'm just disappointed that no one took it upon themselves to put a bullet in that man's head. Sorry, there are just a few things that are worth losing your freedom for.

Jerry

[KC9JIQ]

Jerry, I am FOR unabridged freedom with the first admendment, this is what makes this nation great.

First off, Fred Phelps is NOT a Biblical Christian, Christians do NOT protest, we do not resist evil.

Second, America is a PROTESTANT nation, Fred Phelps(minus the picketing) is preaching what preachers and America used to believe. #

I don't think Fred Phelps should be out there with those signs, BUT Fred has that choice, and under our Government is protected, but it is being destroyed by Fag Judges and Fag enablers.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[edit] I cannot find that picture, but it showed Fred Phelps group protesting while troops came home from Iraq. Had to be about 5 ft from the path of the soldiers walking by.

[KC9JIQ]

Fall From Grace, a documentary about WBC. It will also be available on DVD sometime after the first of the year.

http://video.google.com/videopl....index=0 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4905420645440228367&q=fall+from+grace+documentary&total=16&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0)

[KC5CSG]

Quote[/b] (KC9JIQ @ Oct. 31 2007,16:30)]Fall From Grace, a documentary about WBC. It will also be available on DVD sometime after the first of the year.

http://video.google.com/videopl....index=0 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4905420645440228367&q=fall+from+grace+documentary&total=16&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0)
Yeah, I went and looked. It's pure garbage. What I found humorous is they're praising their right to free speech but one of them was stomping on an american flag in a protest.

Just like you claim they have the freedom to do that okay, fine. They have the freedom to do it. Families also have the freedom to sue them for the harrassment that speech brings them.

The freedom of speech in this country is not absolute. Meaning, it can be illegal if the speech is intended to drive people to the point of doing something illegal. Any unstable person can reasonably argue that what they're doing drove them to put a gun to Mr. Phelps' head and pull the trigger. It's a dangerous game he's playing and he's lucky he'll be paying on this judgement for the rest of his life and not pushing daisies.

KC9JIQ, I'm not gay. I'm married with three sons and one daughter. I also do not agree with homosexuals claiming they're born that way. I believe it's a choice but I also respect the views of people that think otherwise. What other people do in their own home is on them. It doesn't affect me in anyway. Being worried about my neighbor sleeping with a person of the same sex would be about as valid as being worried about my other straight neighbor sleeping with an ugly woman. Both really affect me about the same. Which, in either case, would be no effect at all. What I don't know about my neighbors doesn't affect me. What I do know about them doesn't bother me unless what they're doing is somehow causing me problems. I respect my quiet gay neighbors more than the straights ones that blast their stereo with no regards to the privacy of their neighbors. I see this entirely as an argument over nothing with the hopes of winning the ability to dictate to people how they live their private lives.

Jerry

[kd5kfl]

There are people who upskirt girls. Stick a camera on a pole under a girls skirt and take a picture. They consider this free speech. I wonder if the free speech advocates here would stick up for their rights?

Any person old enough to have experienced Instant Karma knows you don't give a person a hard time when they are having a hard time.

There is free speech, and there are fighting words. it is my belief that harassing mourners at a funeral falls within the category of fighting words.

[KC9JIQ]

Quote[/b] ]Meaning, it can be illegal if the speech is intended to drive people to the point of doing something illegal.

the "intent" with those signs is to get noticed, not drive people to break the law.

[NC5P]

Keep in mind, WBC is a bunch of sleazy attorneys. The church itself probably doesn't amount to a hill of beans financially. They'll also keep this going through the courts for years. The plaintiff shouldn't go spending any of this money yet.

[KC9JIQ]

Lucky for many Pastor Phelps is up in age, I am not sure that the Church will be as prolific when he goes to sleep.

[K5DTR]

About friggin time. I hate seeing how low some people will sink to try to make a point. Even more disturbing is that they do it at funerals. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

[KC5CSG]

Quote[/b] (KC9JIQ @ Oct. 31 2007,16:56)]Quote[/b] ]Meaning, it can be illegal if the speech is intended to drive people to the point of doing something illegal.

the "intent" with those signs is to get noticed, not drive people to break the law.
Give it time sir. They're bound to be spotted by the one guy willing to do anything to put a stop to Mr. Phelps and his motley crew.

Since I've actually been deployed and have been involved in a few skirmishes all in the name of protecting your freedom of speech, I'm going to go ahead and indulge in a little of that freedom myself. You see, I'm one of those people that will never give up my freedom to silence Mr. Phelps. I love my wife and kids too much for that. I do, on the other hand, dream of the day that I'll turn the TV on and I'll see news footage of those stupid signs thrown all about the scene and Mr. Phelps and a few of his adult partners laying in blood soaked heaps which is all that would be left after the fed up gunman does this Nation a great service. I can imagine trying to find a jury that sympathised enough with Mr. Phelps to actually give the guy any time for doing it. Maybe the gunman can explain how dropping Mr. Phelps like a slow deer as his "freedom of expression"http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

The man is eventually going to get what he deserves and people like you are doing him wrong by agreeing with him and emboldening him. Mr. Phelps is an attention whore that has found the one thing that will gather attention to himself. It's all just a matter of time............

Jerry

[ks4du]

It just so happens that I'm a licensed internet lawyer. For a substantial fee I will arbitrate this argument between free speech and harassment. Highest bidder wins.

[KC5CSG]

Quote[/b] (ks4du @ Oct. 31 2007,17:08)]It just so happens that I'm a licensed internet lawyer. For a substantial fee I will arbitrate this argument between free speech and harassment. Highest bidder wins.
I'll give you my no good rotten beagle. Did I say no good and rotten? Nah, I meant sweet and faithful.

[ks4du]

I have a beagle. Do I hear a raise?

[KC5CSG]

Quote[/b] (ks4du @ Oct. 31 2007,17:19)]I have a beagle. #Do I hear a raise?
The wife said you can have the beagle over her dead body. Can I change my bid to an aggrevating wife?

Jerry

[ks4du]

I checked her out on her profile. Yes! You can send her to my QRZ address. Make sure she has a sweater or jacket, it's cold up here. And.....uh.....Don't tell my wife.


Jerry Wins!

[WF7A]

Quote[/b] (KC5CSG @ Oct. 31 2007,09:30)]Quote[/b] (ks4du @ Oct. 31 2007,17:19)]I have a beagle. Do I hear a raise?
The wife said you can have the beagle over her dead body. Can I change my bid to an aggrevating wife?

Jerry
Can I sell my ex to the lowest bidder?

It's nice to see proper justice done for once--that group got what they deserved.

[KC5CSG]

Quote[/b] (ks4du @ Oct. 31 2007,17:34)]I checked her out on her profile. Yes! You can send her to my QRZ address. Make sure she has a sweater or jacket, it's cold up here. And.....uh.....Don't tell my wife.


Jerry Wins!
LOL!!!

[ks4du]

Announcement: KS4DU will now be a multi-op in this weekends SS CW contest. KD5EXX will be logging. (Jerry, that is a very appropriate suffix she has)

[KC5CSG]

Quote[/b] (ks4du @ Oct. 31 2007,17:41)]Announcement: #KS4DU will now be a multi-op in this weekends SS CW contest. KD5EXX will be logging. (Jerry, that is a very appropriate suffix she has)
Wow, someone with a sense of humor. Levity is what has brought us through 17 years of marriage lol. On a lighter note, she hates that call sign. She says it looks like a call a porn queen would ask for. I keep telling her it's just 2 X's and be glad it isn't three.

Jerry

[al2i]

Quote[/b] (K3XR @ Oct. 31 2007,14:02)]It's about time this low life crew got what they deserve. For the hate Rush and other free speech, as long as it's our kind of free speech, crowd, save your breath.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news....t.story (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/bal-westboro1031,0,4193323,print.story)
Why is a conservative not calling for tort reform?

[ks4du]

Quote[/b] (WF7A @ Oct. 31 2007,17:34)]Can I sell my ex to the lowest bidder?
Sorry Rich, I already have one of those. I know how you feel.

Another IDAHO ham!!! Thought I was the only one.

[kc2orw]

Quote[/b] (KC9JIQ @ Oct. 31 2007,18:52)]Fred has the right to protest, as we all do. You're willing to trash the first amendment to stop those who your against.
You may think it's first amendment now but wait till a pile a hillbillies park their butts on your lawn protesting that you don't buy their states grass seed... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Sorry there has to be limits but you and I will just have to disagree on whether some freedom of speech violates other rights. They can protest down the street but not in someones face as that violates someone else's rights...
You can't change other rights just because you agree with a particular groups line of thinking and support all or part of the issue(s) they support, sorry.

[ks4du]

Quote[/b] (al2i @ Oct. 31 2007,17:50)]Why is a conservative not calling for tort reform?
And Dave....Shouldn't you be on the air handing out the much-needed AK contact rather than talking politics on this thread that I'm working so hard to undo? Seriously though...can I come up and visit? My lifelong dream is to visit Alaska!

[KC5CSG]

Maybe Mr. Phelps will now start protesting his judgement instead of making it his goal in life to make families of dead soldiers miserable. Poetic justice?

Jerry

[ks4du]

Arrrgh! Jerry....you're undermining me!

[KC5CSG]

Quote[/b] (ks4du @ Oct. 31 2007,18:06)]Arrrgh! Jerry....you're undermining me!
lol.......sorry

[ks4du]

Jerry, at least you guys are getting more support than us guys who served during the cold war. Look at the bright side!

[KC5CSG]

Quote[/b] (ks4du @ Oct. 31 2007,18:11)]Jerry, at least you guys are getting more support than us guys who served during the cold war. Look at the bright side!
True, I've found the support shown soldiers in this country as outstanding. I just subscribe to the old school of thought when it comes to soldiers that paid with their lives when they commit what I call the "ultimate sacrifice". It demads the ultimate respect.

Jerry

[N3ATS]

Quote[/b] (KC9JIQ @ Oct. 31 2007,18:19)]Second, America is a PROTESTANT nation,
You may want to re-read the First Amendment sir.

[W0LPQ]

JIQ, let's say that your son was killed in Iraq. Phelps and his bunch of ... whatever ... came and protested at the funeral. Would you still agree and support them?

I certainly would not.

[KC5CSG]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Above is the First amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. Now, if we really read into this I don't see how Mr. Phelps is protected.

First, his protests are far from peaceful. The graphic images of stick figures performing sodomy on the signs they use are disgusting. The fact he has children in his crowd that are displaying them is even more disturbing. It can be reasonably argued that any sane person can be driven to violence upon seeing all of this. I have friends that have died because of IEDs. Most soldiers now days have friends that have died because of IEDs. Now, can you honestly believe you can walk up to one of us and say "thank god for IEDs" and expect to walk away with all of your teeth in your mouth? You know that deep in Mr. Phelp's mind he's hoping that his bunch would be attacked. It would give him more fuel for his cause he thinks.

Second, How is protesting at the site of a dead soldier's funeral protesting the government? The First Amendment clearly gives you the right to protest the government. It doesn't give you the right to disrupt a private function being conducted by citizens of this country. Most families burying their dead children at these funerals are not government officials, they're private citizens.

Jerry

[K0RGR]

I agree that Mr. Phelps has a right to free speech. But, if he is free to do what he wants, I am free to do what I want.

I think all good Americans who feel that we should not dishonor our war dead by saying they died because of American's immorality, should join me in taking a dump on the front steps of the WBC's church. If their attorneys wish to raise a legal stink over it, we repeat the act in their offices.

We'll have to build some sort of commode with walls so that we don't violate any indecency laws. We don't have that much free speech, right. Of course, I think that what WBC does is far more obscene that pooping in public.

[WF7A]

Quote[/b] (ks4du @ Oct. 31 2007,09:54)]Quote[/b] (WF7A @ Oct. 31 2007,17:34)]Can I sell my ex to the lowest bidder?
Sorry Rich, I already have one of those. I know how you feel.

Another IDAHO ham!!! Thought I was the only one.
Yup! ...and there's also another Idaho ham on here, N7ZSD...though he may not be on speaking terms with me since I caused him to laugh, spewing coffee on his monitor and keyboard...twice.

I'm on a hot streak. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[kc2orw]

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 31 2007,21:35)]I agree that Mr. Phelps has a right to free speech. But, if he is free to do what he wants, I am free to do what I want.

I think all good Americans who feel that we should not dishonor our war dead by saying they died because of American's immorality, should join me in taking a dump on the front steps of the WBC's church. If their attorneys wish to raise a legal stink over it, we repeat the act in their offices.

We'll have to build some sort of commode with walls so that we don't violate any indecency laws. We don't have that much free speech, right. Of course, I think that what WBC does is far more obscene that pooping in public.
I go along with the spirit of what you say but I wouldn't do what he thinks he should be able to do. However if the courts allow him to continue, unabated, then that is what people should do to him and his followers. I mean they should follow them to their homes and continue protesting them wherever they go. But I expect they have gone to far and even legal system can see that what Phelps and his creeps are doing is beyond reason.
Like the earlier quote said you can protest against the government not private citizens.

[k6bbc]

Bad decision. It will be overturned -- watch and see.

bbc

[KA8DKT]

Firstly, I think the Phelps family's actions are reprehensible.

The judge pointed out to the jury:Quote[/b] ]"You must balance the defendants' expression of religious belief with another citizen's right to privacy," presiding judge Richard D. Bennett instructed jurors yesterday.
For any really fair and dedicated judge, this was probably a tough call.

That said, for me the key line in the story was:Quote[/b] ]Snyder testified that he never saw the content of the signs as he entered and left St. John's Roman Catholic Church on the day of his son's funeral. He glimpsed the signs for the first time during television news reports later that day. A Google search on the Internet weeks later led him to the church's Web site and the posting about Matthew Snyder.
So, how was his privacy invaded? #His argument was, in part, that Westboro was trying to intentionally upset him and his family. #But apparently at the funeral Snyder was unaware of the content of the protest, so how could he have been upset about it? # Were any of his family members aware of the content of the protest at the time? #Looking at the website later and seeing the Westboro version of their son's story surely could not be considered an invasion of privacy. #That sounds more like they could have sued for libel.

I wonder if a transcript of the trial is available. #It might make interesting reading. #It is usually pretty tough to draw conclusions from a newspaper story, but I was unable to find any substantial additional information with a brief web search.

-gary

[n9yb]

Quote[/b] ]Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


But can't they do something about those pesky paparazzi?

[K3XR]

Get the story straight on Westboro.
http://sweetness-light.com/archive....ntalist (http://sweetness-light.com/archive/westboro-is-neither-baptist-nor-fundamentalist)

[KD6NIG]

Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Oct. 31 2007,17:59)]Quote[/b] (KC9JIQ @ Oct. 31 2007,18:52)]Fred has the right to protest, as we all do. You're willing to trash the first amendment to stop those who your against.
You may think it's first amendment now but wait till a pile a hillbillies park their butts on your lawn protesting that you don't buy their states grass seed... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
You have the right to water your lawn at any time.

Well, unless of course you're under water rationing and its not an odd day of the week or whatever system they use http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[kc2orw]

Quote[/b] (KD6NIG @ Nov. 01 2007,12:13)]Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Oct. 31 2007,17:59)]Quote[/b] (KC9JIQ @ Oct. 31 2007,18:52)]Fred has the right to protest, as we all do. You're willing to trash the first amendment to stop those who your against.
You may think it's first amendment now but wait till a pile a hillbillies park their butts on your lawn protesting that you don't buy their states grass seed... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
You have the right to water your lawn at any time.

Well, unless of course you're under water rationing and its not an odd day of the week or whatever system they use http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
We actually have a permanent water restriction that has been in place for the last ten years. However it is not always vigorously enforced, some year yes other years no...
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Really not joking we do have this permanent restriction water and number of reservoirs is not plentiful enough to allow over usage.

[ac4ut]

Disruption of a funeral and the subsequent added pain inflicted in the name of free speech is too high a price to pay for the right.
With freedom come responsibility.
Good decision by the court and I suspect it will garner public approval.

[KD6NIG]

Quote[/b] (k6bbc @ Oct. 31 2007,20:28)]Bad decision. It will be overturned -- watch and see.

bbc
It won't be overturned.

But, similar to the OJ case, they won't be able to collect, and since there isn't a specific law against them, they will just carry on.

Until they do it at the wrong funeral someday and someone just gets so angry it results in violence. Not that I'm for that though I don't like these people at all, but in todays world, I'm honestly surprised that restraint has actually worked.

I figured by now some nut would have done something.

Them failing to pay and probably carrying on as before will increase the potential for it. It won't surprise me if it happens.

[ac4ut]

Some ststes alredy have a law against disruption of a funeral.
Some are specific to military funerals and some are more broad in scope,which is what I agree with.
A funeral is a funeral.
I wouldn't even speak bad of Hillary is she were to expire.

[N9XR]

Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Oct. 31 2007,10:34)]Good they are slime don't matter if you are for or against the Iraq war but at least respect peoples privacy especially at that time.

Fred Phelps is also a Democrat or at least he ran as one...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Phelps#Democratic_Party
You are correct that Phelps ran for office as a Democrat. However, the KS Democratic party does not endorse him. In 1998, he ran for Governor as a Dem and the party really had no plans to run a candidate against the incumbent Republican because the state was doing well and he had a massive amount of support. The party's hand was forced to pull a good state rep from his post to run against Phelps and then run against Graves so the Dems would not have Phelps on the November ballot.

Tom Sawyer. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Sawyer_(Kansas_politician))

[w3scm]

[QUOTE=Quote ]
Why is a conservative not calling for tort reform?
This conservative is. #That is a ridiculous award and it will no doubt be mitigated by the courts, although since the judgment has been rendered, eventually, there's going to be a hefty payout. #I do not think this is the way to go about it.

Beyond that, as is usually the case except here on the ZED, this is a complicated situaiton that has multiple component parts. #Free speech is a right. #Was THIS free speech, and if it was, is that ALL there is to it? #And can we take some action to stop or punish THIS free speech without sending all of this first amendment right down the toilet?

In thinking about this, the first thing that came to me is that no decent person anywhere would think this kind of "protest" is a right thing. #No one. #Everyone would agree, I hope, that none of us could properly grieve at a funeral under these conditions due to emotional upset over the protest.

Second, did the grieving family have any rights, or were all the rights retained by the "protesters"? #Obviously, you have the right to bury your dead in peace. I guess, given past rulings, that's as long as you or the deceased aren't public figures. #This guy certainly wasn't.

So, I think that what we have here is harrassment and disorderly conduct. #And that trumps "free speech", I would think. #These fools can't march into the public library or the national cathedral and start screaming at you or about their cause, can they? #

There ought to be some legal or judicial protection for citizens going about the normal activities of life in settings where those activities normally and customarily take place without other citizens actively preventing them from taking place.

This ought to be a criminal matter and those idiots ought to get 3 months in jail, a fine, and litter patrol for 9 months.

[N9XR]

Ad Hominem argument
Straw Man fallacy
Argument From Adverse Consequences
Special Pleading
Fallacy of the Excluded Middle
Disparate Burden Of Proof fallacy
Argument By Question
Reductive Fallacy
Begging The Question
Argument from Bad Analogy
Causal Reductionism
Complex Question fallacy
Argument Ad Nauseam
Argument By Selective Observation
Argument By Selective Reading

[kd5kfl]

Kurt Vonnegut explained it well in Ice Nine:

"Any scientist who can't explain his work to an eight year old is a charlatan"

Substituting lawyer for scientist, explain the various points of view expressed here to an eight year old. My guess would be that any eight year old who's going to be an OK person when they grow up would come to the same decision the court did.

[w3scm]

Quote[/b] (n9xr @ Oct. 31 2007,11:45)]Ad Hominem argument
Straw Man fallacy
Argument From Adverse Consequences
Special Pleading
Fallacy of the Excluded Middle
Disparate Burden Of Proof fallacy
Argument By Question
Reductive Fallacy
Begging The Question
Argument from Bad Analogy
Causal Reductionism
Complex Question fallacy
Argument Ad Nauseam
Argument By Selective Observation
Argument By Selective Reading
Very clever.

Original thought?

[KD6NIG]

Quote[/b] (w3scm @ Nov. 01 2007,10:34)][QUOTE=Quote ]
Why is a conservative not calling for tort reform?
This conservative is. That is a ridiculous award and it will no doubt be mitigated by the courts, although since the judgment has been rendered, eventually, there's going to be a hefty payout. I do not think this is the way to go about it.

Beyond that, as is usually the case except here on the ZED, this is a complicated situaiton that has multiple component parts. Free speech is a right. Was THIS free speech, and if it was, is that ALL there is to it? And can we take some action to stop or punish THIS free speech without sending all of this first amendment right down the toilet?

In thinking about this, the first thing that came to me is that no decent person anywhere would think this kind of "protest" is a right thing. No one. Everyone would agree, I hope, that none of us could properly grieve at a funeral under these conditions due to emotional upset over the protest.

Second, did the grieving family have any rights, or were all the rights retained by the "protesters"? Obviously, you have the right to bury your dead in peace. I guess, given past rulings, that's as long as you or the deceased aren't public figures. This guy certainly wasn't.

So, I think that what we have here is harrassment and disorderly conduct. And that trumps "free speech", I would think. These fools can't march into the public library or the national cathedral and start screaming at you or about their cause, can they?

There ought to be some legal or judicial protection for citizens going about the normal activities of life in settings where those activities normally and customarily take place without other citizens actively preventing them from taking place.

This ought to be a criminal matter and those idiots ought to get 3 months in jail, a fine, and litter patrol for 9 months.
Agreed, however I honestly think the person who brought the suit should have made it class action status.

Though I don't believe he won't see even 5% of that settlement, much less his attorney fees, anyway.

Had it been class-action, at least perhaps the disrupted funerals would have been paid for.

But, like I said above, I don't see them stopping their activities where it isn't outlawed. If they had any fear, they would have stopped at the hint of a lawsuit. They don't care, just like many groups, about anything but getting their cause media attention.

Sounds to me like their media attention came with a price. The media won't ever see it though. And I'm sure they like all the attention they are getting right now too.

Like it or not, the only people paying right now as usual are all of us. That judgement, if upheld, in any amount, won't be payable, unless they drop it under $100,000. They don't have the funds to pay it, and they know it.

It does put quite a dent in the availability of funds for travel though.

[w3scm]

KD6NIG, I agree with most of that, I just don't think civil suits are the right avenue to control/punish this kind of thing and a lot of other things.

Acutally, as much as I dislike the idea of hate crime laws, since it punishes assumed motivation rather than than behavior or result, it's the same thing in the end. We've determined that you can't show certain symbols in certain places, or even use certain images (remember outlawing blackface?) and this kind of thing should be the same. We've got enough lawyers and judges to get the wording right.

[KA8DKT]

Quote[/b] (K3XR @ Nov. 01 2007,12:11)]Get the story straight on Westboro.
http://sweetness-light.com/archive....ntalist (http://sweetness-light.com/archive/westboro-is-neither-baptist-nor-fundamentalist)
I thought this was pretty good until I got to the gratuitious remark about the mainstream media.

It is truly a shame that our "profit is the only thing" oriented media cannot seem to afford their investigators and reporters enough time to check their facts. #Thus the media is often neither "left" nor "right"; they are just too busy to be accurate.

Yet, on the other hand the Westboro church does admit to following "Baptist" precepts. #Frankly, for most people, almost any group calling themselves "Baptists" are considered fundamentalist by much of the rest of the populace in America. #But I do understand that there is fundamentalist, and there is fundamentalist and the Westboro group is surely falling off the edge of far right.

I wonder if someone of authority in some official Baptist organization will call the AP, ABC, or whoever is the originator of the story and asked for a public clarification. #Then, they too, will find that much of the mainstream media is just too busy making money to be bothered with accuracy...for anyone.

-gary

[N9XR]

Quote[/b] (w3scm @ Nov. 01 2007,06:04)]Quote[/b] (n9xr @ Oct. 31 2007,11:45)]Ad Hominem argument
Straw Man fallacy
Argument From Adverse Consequences
Special Pleading
Fallacy of the Excluded Middle
Disparate Burden Of Proof fallacy
Argument By Question
Reductive Fallacy
Begging The Question
Argument from Bad Analogy
Causal Reductionism
Complex Question fallacy
Argument Ad Nauseam
Argument By Selective Observation
Argument By Selective Reading
Very clever.

Original thought?
No, but placed appropriately.

[n6hcm]

Quote[/b] (KC9JIQ @ Oct. 31 2007,15:55)]and what does this have to do about privacy, they are protesting on the STREETS, PUBLIC places obeying all laws.
not when they are on the grounds of a private cemetery ... i'm sure some of the fallen are buried in VA public cemeteries, and many others are not.

[kc2orw]

Well they may be Baptist but they are also innerrent fundamentalist, most of whom have some item or some passage interpreted incorrectly.
I figure most Baptist are way more mainstream then this cast of characters.

I just thought of one possible exception that might allow them to protest at funerals.
If you had a funeral at one of the public cemeteries like Arlington as an example. You really couldn't prevent them from legally protesting. But at private cemeteries they could legally be restrained. Churches are private so with the exception of sidewalks they would be limited. Some local ordinances would limit their ability to execute such protests.
So their are some exceptions where it would be difficult to prevent them from protesting.
All that said I still think they are slime not worthy of being considered Christian.

[KC5CSG]

Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Nov. 01 2007,12:01)]Well they may be Baptist but they are also innerrent fundamentalist, most of whom have some item or some passage interpreted incorrectly. #
I figure most Baptist are way more mainstream then this cast of characters.

I just thought of one possible exception that might allow them to protest at funerals.
If you had a funeral at one of the public cemeteries like Arlington as an example. You really couldn't prevent them from legally protesting. But at private cemeteries they could legally be restrained. Churches are private so with the exception of sidewalks they would be limited. Some local ordinances would limit their ability to execute such protests.
So their are some exceptions where it would be difficult to prevent them from protesting.
All that said I still think they are slime not worthy of being considered Christian.
Some cemetaries may be public but the ceremony itself can be private. I know when I buried my mom and attended funerals for a few soldiers the question always asked to the family is if they wish for an open or closed ceremony.

Jerry

[w3scm]

Quote[/b] (n9xr @ Oct. 31 2007,12:58)]No, but placed appropriately.
Succinct is good. Although I could think of a more appropriate placement.

[N9XR]

Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Nov. 01 2007,07:01)]Well they may be Baptist but they are also innerrent fundamentalist, most of whom have some item or some passage interpreted incorrectly.
I figure most Baptist are way more mainstream then this cast of characters.

I just thought of one possible exception that might allow them to protest at funerals.
If you had a funeral at one of the public cemeteries like Arlington as an example. You really couldn't prevent them from legally protesting. But at private cemeteries they could legally be restrained. Churches are private so with the exception of sidewalks they would be limited. Some local ordinances would limit their ability to execute such protests.
So their are some exceptions where it would be difficult to prevent them from protesting.
All that said I still think they are slime not worthy of being considered Christian.
With whack jobs like these, you can only label them as Phelps' followers. This is what they are. No one should form their opinion of the Baptist church from these loonies.

[kc2orw]

Quote[/b] (KC5CSG @ Nov. 01 2007,15:08)]Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Nov. 01 2007,12:01)]Well they may be Baptist but they are also innerrent fundamentalist, most of whom have some item or some passage interpreted incorrectly.
I figure most Baptist are way more mainstream then this cast of characters.

I just thought of one possible exception that might allow them to protest at funerals.
If you had a funeral at one of the public cemeteries like Arlington as an example. You really couldn't prevent them from legally protesting. But at private cemeteries they could legally be restrained. Churches are private so with the exception of sidewalks they would be limited. Some local ordinances would limit their ability to execute such protests.
So their are some exceptions where it would be difficult to prevent them from protesting.
All that said I still think they are slime not worthy of being considered Christian.
Some cemetaries may be public but the ceremony itself can be private. I know when I buried my mom and attended funerals for a few soldiers the question always asked to the family is if they wish for an open or closed ceremony.

Jerry
I don't know that argument is a bit flimsy to be perfectly honest. But don't worry I don''t wish to side with whack jobs on something like this. However one has to be careful when possibly tampering with freedom of speech. I guess we will have to see if the harassment argument holds up...
It shouldn't be that easy for people to harass other people that would be pure anarchy. Sure harass politician but not private citizens.

[N9XR]

Quote[/b] (w3scm @ Nov. 01 2007,07:08)]Quote[/b] (n9xr @ Oct. 31 2007,12:58)]No, but placed appropriately.
Succinct is good. Although I could think of a more appropriate placement.
Ouch! Be careful then.

[KC9JIQ]

Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Nov. 01 2007,13:04)]Quote[/b] (KC5CSG @ Nov. 01 2007,15:08)]Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Nov. 01 2007,12:01)]Well they may be Baptist but they are also innerrent fundamentalist, most of whom have some item or some passage interpreted incorrectly. #
I figure most Baptist are way more mainstream then this cast of characters.

I just thought of one possible exception that might allow them to protest at funerals.
If you had a funeral at one of the public cemeteries like Arlington as an example. You really couldn't prevent them from legally protesting. But at private cemeteries they could legally be restrained. Churches are private so with the exception of sidewalks they would be limited. Some local ordinances would limit their ability to execute such protests.
So their are some exceptions where it would be difficult to prevent them from protesting.
All that said I still think they are slime not worthy of being considered Christian.
Some cemetaries may be public but the ceremony itself can be private. I know when I buried my mom and attended funerals for a few soldiers the question always asked to the family is if they wish for an open or closed ceremony.

Jerry
I don't know that argument is a bit flimsy to be perfectly honest. But don't worry I don''t wish to side with whack jobs on something like this. However one has to be careful when possibly tampering with freedom of speech. I guess we will have to see if the harassment argument holds up...
It shouldn't be that easy for people to harass other people that would be pure anarchy. Sure harass politician but not private citizens.
this is why I hope the phelps camp stays around, they are lawyers, and our Fist amendment is soo important, I would rather have phelps out there picketing then the government coming to my door for somthing and I can't do a thing about it because of lost freedoms.

I think I would much rather have Phelps do the fighting for us all. #It's groups like Westboro, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc that protect our freedoms from greedy money grubbing politicians who's answer is to pass more laws restricting your freedoms.

Quote[/b] ]So, I think that what we have here is harrassment and disorderly conduct. #And that trumps "free speech", I would think. #These fools can't march into the public library or the national cathedral and start screaming at you or about their cause, can they?

They sure don't at funerals, if ya a 1,000 feet away, that is NOT "marching in" to the service, BIG difference there bud.

Quote[/b] (N3ATS @ Oct. 31 2007,18:20)]Quote[/b] (KC9JIQ @ Oct. 31 2007,18:19)]Second, America is a PROTESTANT nation,
You may want to re-read the First Amendment sir.

You may want to study your HISTORY sir. #The Protestant immigrants to the New World brought a deep-seated distrust of Roman Catholicism. In fact there was much fear that JFK would take orders from the pope. #Anti-Catholic prejudice, was very much alive in America, and still is.

"For God has put it into their hearts to carry out His own purpose by acting in harmony in surrendering their royal power and authority to the beast, until the prophetic words, intentions and promises of God shall be fulfilled."